To cringe at this article (free natural birth)

[boogiewoogie]

I couldn't help but feel but also sad when I read this article.

For a start, whilst sexual intercourse is often a necessary prerequisite although not always for birth to take place, giving birth itself is not a sexual experience!

She also says that a free birth is an open celebration of love and understanding but surely there are other ways and isn't having a child that has been conceived through love a celebration itself?

At the end she says that she has a fantastic relationship with this child and that it is different from her first therefor implying that her relationship with the first is inferior.

Am I also being naive in thinking that birth plans do not always go as planned? Okay, perhaps some of this is probably sour grapes but I am happy with the natural births that I had as they required little assistance.

The birth of course should be a pleasant experience and whilst it is nice to hear that she has had an amazing experience given her first birth, I just feel that a lot of women already feel stigmatised for having C sections and that articles such as this puts a lot of pressure on mothers to have a certain type of birth amongst other things to be a "model parent" whatever that may be.

' I think nobody can possibly argue that the birth method cannot affect bonding between mother and baby. '

They might well do but it is very unfeeling to tell the world that you have a 'fantastic relationship' with the toddler but not with you older DC. Poor Aurora doesn't stand a chance-she has been written off. The mother could at least keep it a secret from Aurora.

Really? It's not important what kind of birth you have?

Try telling that to my dear friend who suffered post traumatic stress disorder after the birth of her second child and was institutionalised. She still has problems looking at her DS without having horrible flashbacks.

I think she'd probably deck you if she heard that you thought she'd put too much emphasis on having a perfect birth.

pisces- have you ever spoken to any older women about their birth experiences? There are ladies of 70 and 80 who are still nursing post traumatic stress and depression about their birth experiences.

What I'm trying to say is that birth is not at all like a wedding, it's a primal event that can leave long-term trauma in women. I am not trying to say that what this lady did was right or wrong, but it worked for her, and avoided her the (to her) very real trauma of her first birth.

She shouldn't then tell the world that she loves her second DC (if she has one)but not the first.

She didn't say that didn't love her first child. She said that it had affected their relationship. That is not at all the same thing. And by the time the child is reading the news, it is unlikely to be still online, so unless her mother makes a point of showing her the printed article when she is in her teens (and at her most vulnerable) then she is unlikely to be too affected by it.

And fwiw I love her daughters' names.

Where did she say she didn't love her first child? She said the relationship was very different.

I agree that a traumatic birth can alter the early bonding. I experienced this after emergency Caesarian with DS1, and inability to breast feed.

Some of this was down to my unrealistic expectations about how much control I would be able to have over events, and how much I would be able to cope with the pain of childbirth.

However, I can't accept that free birthing is a safe alternative.

'The whole experience was incredibly liberating. Ophelia ? who is now 14 months old ? and I have a fantastic relationship; it's amazing how different it is to the one I have with Aurora, who is now five years old. This was a healing process for our whole family. Now I'm pregnant for the third time. This time I am enjoying a completely unassisted pregnancy and will of course have another free birth!'

You think it is acceptable to write this in a national newspaper for anyone to read-and Aurora when older? I'm sorry but I don't. She is now going to have a third and if all goes well will have another 'fantastic relationship',and Aurora will still be out in the cold. It wasn't a 'healing' process for Aurora who will always be second best.
If she thought she couldn't bond with poor Aurora I don't think she should have had any more-she should have concentrated on her first.

No, I can't say I'm particularly keen on the notion of freebirthing either.

But I actually think this article was searingly honest rather than smug. Why shouldn't she revel in her positive birth experience?

It doesn't say the one I had with Aurora-it says the one I have with Aurora.

I think this is irresponsible
(giving birth unassisted I mean)
It's a shame her first home birth didn't go how she planned, but without hearing from the mw impossible to guess why not- maybe mw needed the lights on so she could see what she was doing? maybe there was a reason she had to go to hospital.
Nowhere does she say that the baby's well being was a priority, only about the sexual experience for her ahd her dp.
I think this sort of thing gives natural birth a really bad name, speaking as someone who had 1 hb and 2 hospital births without pr.
I absolutely agree that unecessary intervention is harmful and can escalate and that birth can be traumatic and that that can interfere with bonding. But would nver choose to give birth without a mw.
Sorry- it seems self indulgent and selfish.

".....and Aurora will still be out in the cold. It wasn't a 'healing' process for Aurora who will always be second best."

How on earth do you know? How do you know their family dynamic? I think you're making a lot of assumptions based on not much.

Nowhere does she say she doesn't love her first child. She might have found the relationship difficult as a result of negative feelings about the birth - whether you agree she should or not is irrelevant as that's how she may feel. Lots of women feel that way too. Condemn them all you will and the decisions they make about having more children but it doesn't really help much.

Having said that, if I'd written any article about my children, I'd definitely name change and keep it anonymous even if it were a solely positive piece.

sabire I would never criticise someone (like you) who wanted a home birth, I would criticise someone who wanted a free birth.

And the article, whilst not using the word "enjoyable", does mention the process being "sexual", "empowering" and "liberating".

duchesse, are there two different Janet's this has happened to? God I hope not.

You say Janet Freeman as well but imply that it was a long time ago.

The one I found was Janet Fraser, the baby was a girl and was earlier this year.

"And the article, whilst not using the word "enjoyable", does mention the process being "sexual", "empowering" and "liberating"."

exactly how I would describe both of my births, except I would include enjoyable.

i could not disagree more with piscesmoon, that the birth is just one day, and it does not matter

of course, the health of the baby is vitally important but so is the health - mental and physical - of the mother

to think the mode of delivery and the aftermath has no effect on bonding and the first few days and weeks or even months and years post natally , could not be further from the truth

if it did not matter, these threads would never get past a couple of posts.

my son was born almost 10 years ago, and i still remember the upset afterwards so clearly and viscerally.

conversely, i remember the utter elation and joy after my daughter's birth almost 4 yeras ago jsut as clearly

i don' tlove them any differently or any more/less, but the births affected the lenght of time it took me to bond and how i felt afterwards. PND first time, absolutely fine second time

Does no one care that she is writing an article about her 'wonderful birth' and her wonderful relationship with Ophelia, but in the same breath says it is very different from the one she has (not had) with Aurora?

I can see that she had difficulties, but it means that she shouldn't write articles about it-she has no need to tell the world it was 'wonderful' when it wasn't-it has left her with DDs with unequal relationships.
I hope that the next birth is lovely but that she keeps quiet about it.

great ot worked out better 2nd time round but she does come across as a misinformed, egotistical, pain in the arse.

If giving birth were "similar" to sex the majority percentage of women would be childless unless they happened to get pg on their first time.

"freebirthing" sounds selfish and irresponsible, in fact downright risky tomother and child.

She seems a bit pd, what she says about her first child at the end of the article is awful, horrible she may one day read about this when she's older in a national newspaper

YANBU

Apart from the bit at the end about her relationship with her older daughter, I thought it was a lovely article.

She made a choice to birth the way she wanted. Presumably she had weighed up the pros and cons and decided that this way was best for her.
It all turned out well. No guarantees that it would have done but presumably she looked into the risks and decided on balance things would work out well.
As for the vowel sounds, it worked for her. It might work for someone else, too, and being in the article might prompt that someone to try it. Whatever works.
If her first labour had gone the way she wanted and not had a seemingly disrespectful m/w then perhaps she wouldn't have chosen freebirthing for subsequent babies.

Not a risk that I would be willing to take but then I preferred to deliver in hospital where all the equipment would be on hand should I need it. However, I did labour at home until transition whenever I could to avoid any interfering. Reading articles such as these gave me confidence that it wasn't the end of the world if the baby was coming and there wasn't a hcp present.

Sorry, I meant Laura Shanley, who is the daughter of a free birth campaigner and had all hers at home unassisted.

It wasn't the sort of birth I would want but I am all for people having choice, however I feel she is very self centred and it is unforgivable to write about her daughter that way. She didn't even have to mention her first birth except to say that it wasn't a patch on the second or that it was in hospital with intervention. Some things are best left unsaid. I could almost cry for Aurora in that family.

Why is one woman enjoying the process of giving birth "self-indulgent claptrap"? Because it's not everyone's experience ? Is it only possible to approve of someone's experience when it hasn't been ideal and/or matches your own? Good god, grow up.

There is a lot of hyperventilating on this thread about a woman saying she has a 'different relationship' with one child. People are imagining and assuming terrible things. Different does NOT mean cold or abusive or unloving. I have different relationships with everyone important to me. The author of the article seems to be saying that the relationship she has been able to have with her second daughter is healing the whole family (which she implies includes her relationship with the first child). I assume that a happy birth often heals the trauma of a previous difficult birth. The fact that she is able to experience a good bond with her second child is good news for her other daughter too surely, as that gives her a wonderful model to reach for. The fact that the bond is so important to her is a good sign for all her children.

It's strange that this article has provoked such extreme reactions. I genuinely saw nothing smug or cruel in it at all (even though I wouldn't choose an unassisted birth myself).

Exactly Blinder!